Editorial policy

Peer-review process

Review procedure for scientific manuscripts submitted to The Journal of Applied Computer Science & Telecommunications.

Confidential review 9 stages

  1. Compulsory peer review

    All scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial team of the Journal undergo a compulsory peer-review process according to the approved order.

  2. Initial editorial assessment

    The Editors establish the correspondence of the manuscript to the profile of the journal and send it for first consideration to the executive editor, who determines its scientific value and appoints a reviewer. Articles are reviewed by members of the Editorial Board or external experts working in fields corresponding to the manuscript topic.

  3. Confidentiality

    The peer-review process is performed confidentially. The author may view the text of the review. The Editors will move to the double-blind peer-review procedure, in which the reviewer will not know the author's name either.

  4. Review period

    The review period is controlled by the Editors depending on the situation and may be prolonged at the request of the reviewer.

  5. Reviewer recommendation

    To obtain a complete and objective review, the Editorial Board provides reviewers with an assessment questionnaire. Based on this assessment, the reviewer makes one of four recommendations:

    Publish in its present form
    Publish after specified corrections
    Send to another specialist for additional review
    Reject publication

  6. Revision and repeat review

    If the review recommends correction and refinement, the head of the editorial team sends its text to the author. The author should implement the recommendations or provide a reasoned response to them, completely or partially. The revised manuscript is submitted for peer review again.

  7. Resolution of conflicts

    If the author and reviewer have insoluble contradictions, the Editorial Board may send the article to another reviewer. In conflict situations, the manuscript may be referred to a member of the Editorial Advisory Board, with the final decision made by the Editor-in-Chief.

  8. Negative recommendation

    An article not recommended for publication by a reviewer is not accepted for reconsideration. The negative review report is sent to the author by email, fax, or post.

  9. Final editorial decision

    A positive review alone is insufficient for publication. The Editorial Board makes the final decision based on the feasibility of the work and its correspondence to the journal's subject. In conflict situations, the Editor-in-Chief decides. Each decision is recorded in the minutes of the Editorial Board meeting.